[Info-vax] An alternative history of computing

[Simon Clubley]

On 2021-07-25, Scott Dorsey <kludge at panix.com> wrote:
> Dave Froble  <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>>
>>Regardless, the claim was "(the DECnet specification was freely 
>>available)"  The claim was never "open", and definitely not "open 
>>software".  I don't know how "freely" it was, but I do know there was 
>>DECnet implementations on other than VMS.
>
> The Phase IV documentation is enough to build a working decnet client
> to move packets back and forth.
>
> The higher stuff like mail is not as well documented.  It would be hard
> to do it without the fiche, I think.  But a lot of people did it, including
> Sun and IBM.  They may have used the fiche.
>

Exactly. And there are always legal risks with implementing protocols
that do not have public specifications. For the same reason, those public
specifications must also have been released _as_ public specifications
and not just fallen into the public domain.

For example, there's now a copy of the LAT specification on Bitsavers.
(At least there was when I looked through the documents on there. I don't
know if it's still there).

This also extends to items under copyright, not patents.

For example, there's a public copy of the Pillar specification, but it
appears to have fallen into the public domain, instead of being released
_as_ a public document.

As such, if I were to implement a compiler to the specification in that
document, could I get into legal trouble for doing so if I released the
compiler for general use ?

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.